If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

I don’t understand… Is Windows a good example of how to make things? Do we want to clone Windows?

No, absolutely not.
But I do think that the developers of Wayland (or any other similar system) should know how others designed and architectured their solution and why they chose that particular design.

I don't see how this is the same. It's not. On Windows you have your own button, complete with control over the graphics and layout.

You quote out of contextOn purpose? I never wrote that it's the same. The original claim was that Linux WMs can't have menu buttons in the title bar and I disproved you.
The look and feel of that button should be defined by the WM.

Originally Posted by Ancurio

Well then you probably shouldn't also ever bother about using Wayland, as this design decision will not change =)

And who are you to claim authority over the all future development decisions?

Originally Posted by Ancurio

Why should applications trick me into thinking they look the same with same titlebars, when their window is rendered completely differently from each other (Qt, GTK, EFL)?

If you can be tricked by a title bar how the application itself looks, you'd be the biggest retard the world has ever seen.
The toolkit even has nothing to do with this. If each application can decide how title bars look and feel, it'll lead do inconsistencies even within applications using a shared toolkit.

Considering that as part of Canonical's usability vision they need to have control over all title bars. I doubt they'll be willing to let application developers fuck up Unity's look and feel. Canonical can be surprisingly persuasive and even willing to actually contribute code when it comes to that. It was Canonical who wrote and contributed the code to Qt to export application menus via dbus to make Qt applications integrate into Unity.

Well, I'm curious how it'll actually end up. I have the gut feeling that in the end applications won't get complete control over the window decoration, despite Wayland's design intentions.

Originally Posted by Ancurio

It's not meant to make it easier, it's meant to make fucking roundtrip lag disappear.

Have you ever ran Chrome on Linux? Do you actually know that applications can bypass window manager decorations right now on X? The window decorations cannot be enforced.

So seriously, what are you talking about? On Wayland, window decorations will be standardized by your DE. All KDE apps will still look the same. All Gnome apps will look the same. Unless an app doesn't want to.

Originally Posted by Awesomeness

The look and feel of that button should be defined by the WM.

And who are you to claim authority over who should define the look and feel of buttons?

And who are you to claim authority over the all future development decisions?

What the hell are you talking about? If you were familiar with Wayland in even the slightest,
you'd have long known that this is a standpoint Khristian has made clear he won't leave.
It's not going to happen, period.

Originally Posted by Awesomeness

If you can be tricked by a title bar how the application itself looks, you'd be the biggest retard the world has ever seen.
The toolkit even has nothing to do with this. If each application can decide how title bars look and feel, it'll lead do inconsistencies even within applications using a shared toolkit.

I'm talking from the viewpoint of a hypothetical use you idiot. I'm indirectly quoting Khristian here,
but to have a consistent experience it doesn't really help to have a tiny scratch at the top look the same across all apps,
while the titlebar and actual content mismatch in style. Consistency within app > fake consistency across apps.

Originally Posted by Awesomeness

Considering that as part of Canonical's usability vision they need to have control over all title bars. I doubt they'll be willing to let application developers fuck up Unity's look and feel. Canonical can be surprisingly persuasive and even willing to actually contribute code when it comes to that. It was Canonical who wrote and contributed the code to Qt to export application menus via dbus to make Qt applications integrate into Unity.

Don't know what they'll do, but I don't think they'd be stupid enough to fork Wayland over this issue.
Actually, it's not going to be an issue at all. If you look at how native theme engines can make either Qt look almost the same as GTK and vise versa,
there might not even be a need for a shared library with deco drawing routines / unified theming.

Originally Posted by Awesomeness

Well, I'm curious how it'll actually end up. I have the gut feeling that in the end applications won't get complete control over the window decoration, despite Wayland's design intentions.

Project leader's words > your gut feeling.

Originally Posted by Awesomeness

No idea which lag you are referring to.

Synchronization issues due to X, the WM and the client each having to wait for each other.
I'm not really good at explaining it, but I've sure experienced it with apps like Inkscape.
You should consult Wayland resources for info on that.

Do you actually know that applications can bypass window manager decorations right now on X?

Yes.

Originally Posted by RealNC

And who are you to claim authority over who should define the look and feel of buttons?

Someone with some experience in usability. Unlike you, obviously. No surprise you have the reputation of being a troll.

My views on usability and consistency on that matter are backed up by John Siracusa from ArsTechnica who repeatedly criticized similar instances under OSX (iTunes’ vertical window buttons, “natural” look of Address Book, etc.).

Originally Posted by Ancurio

What the hell are you talking about? If you were familiar with Wayland in even the slightest,
you'd have long known that this is a standpoint Khristian has made clear he won't leave.
It's not going to happen, period.

Despite being hosted on fdo, Wayland is mostly an Intel project. If Intel orders him to implement something else (or at least an alternative route), it'll happen.

Originally Posted by Ancurio

Consistency within app > fake consistency across apps. […] Actually, it's not going to be an issue at all. If you look at how native theme engines can make either Qt look almost the same as GTK and vise versa

It's not fake consistency, it's one brick to get consistency throughout the system.
What you simply fail to understand is that it's not about the look alone, even though I repeatedly wrote “look and feel”.

Once users get GNOME applications into their hand which they cannon minimize under other DEs (Plasma Desktop or whatever) because minimizing is not something that fits into GNOME Shell’s workflow, a shitstorm will break out.

Originally Posted by Ancurio

Project leader's words > your gut feeling.

Linus Torvalds once said that in-kernel, non-modular drivers are the way to go. We have kernel modules now.